<quoted text>Now you mention social predators who hold power in this society. Let's see how they are using their tools for their own benefit instead of mankind. Does that empower you? Are you demonizing them because their motives didn't serve your best interest? Perhaps that is your excuse for you to express your own prejudices. You ostracize people that you don't see fit in your imagined utopia. Who is dreaming now? I am not dreaming all the time, mind you. Most of the time I am just AWARE.

That's a bit vague. Of course, I don't endorse predatory behavior. Am I engaging in it, or is my sense of morality misdirected? You can question all you want, but if you don't got anything in the game, does it matter?

I don't think I ostracize but I am willing to point out obviously complicated situations and rudeness masked as "belief" that all gets painted over with sound bites. Would you rather polite platitudes that just bore everyone to death?

This is an anonymous forum. Anyone can choose to advertize their identity or pick something a bit deceptive, or none at all. It doesn't matter to me. As our FBI friends might say; "Just the facts, ma'am." In this environment, opinions can matter too, but it's important to separate the two.

Science and opinion are just not going to get along. Science and belief are far worse together. If you don't like getting caught in the middle, it's important to acknowledge those boundaries or you'll end up speaking in tongues and hoping that others can decode it all. Don't we have enough of THAT around here?

I'm not the one claiming that one exists. The person making the claim needs to describe it.<quoted text>If I said that blizzblats come in all shapes, sizes, and forms, would you know any more about what a blizzblat *is* than you did before?

<quoted text>I choose to kind of call it God because the oneness of everything is something that I experience all the time. I experience the parts of a whole and take its entirety as one embodiment. And because this experience is in human form, it's just appropriate to relate to it like any other human would relate to another human. lol.Why do I even try to explain the unexplicable?

<quoted text>That's a bit vague. Of course, I don't endorse predatory behavior. Am I engaging in it, or is my sense of morality misdirected? You can question all you want, but if you don't got anything in the game, does it matter?I don't think I ostracize but I am willing to point out obviously complicated situations and rudeness masked as "belief" that all gets painted over with sound bites. Would you rather polite platitudes that just bore everyone to death?This is an anonymous forum. Anyone can choose to advertize their identity or pick something a bit deceptive, or none at all. It doesn't matter to me. As our FBI friends might say; "Just the facts, ma'am." In this environment, opinions can matter too, but it's important to separate the two.Science and opinion are just not going to get along. Science and belief are far worse together. If you don't like getting caught in the middle, it's important to acknowledge those boundaries or you'll end up speaking in tongues and hoping that others can decode it all. Don't we have enough of THAT around here?

ME nothing in the game? I AM GAME. muhahaha! If you want to play the dominant role, then bring it. You can start with spanking my behind but I charge back, so watch it ol' man!

Actually, I'm all for civil rights but this isn't it. I'm for a degree of socialism too, but in small increments, not in mandates that have no specified end date. Personally, I don't like the State meddling in marriage at all. Create a universal civil union contract that has no basis on sex and leave it at that.

The Church can even bar people from marriage if they have not gotten that contract, but get rid of the State sanctioning of any types of sexual relationships and stop punishing men and women for pregnancies out of wedlock. Stop subsidizing breeding. Yes, you can have school lunch programs if your district wants them. Just don't set up tax codes that put money in peoples pockets for being a parent. If they can't afford to have kids, DON'T!

This is a form of behavior modification on the part of the State. All of those efforts are destined to fester the evil at work, not fix it. The gay "thang"? Well, watch and see!

Rationality isn't at work here. Party loyalists won't ever see it though so it's important to address behavior modification WITH behavior modification!(behavior modification: yet another bland platitude that amounts to state authorized bullying) They can walk away anytime! They won't!:)

<quoted text>ME nothing in the game? I AM GAME. muhahaha! If you want to play the dominant role, then bring it. You can start with spanking my behind but I charge back, so watch it ol' man!Science need opinionated facts too.

No it doesn't!

Silly wabbit! I don't hunt, but I might set the occasional trap for those who aren't thinking clearly!

FREE SERVANT wrote: Trees have also came in variety from the beginning and they are among the oldest living things.

Anonymous wrote:What is your point and why does the longevity of trees play into it?

I understood Free Servant to imply that if the trees date back from so long ago, that implies that they speciated that long ago.If they speciated that long ago, then it is most likely that all of life speciated from the very beginning.That, in turn, implies that every kind was created in the very beginning, as Creationism predicts, and that we are not all descended from a lowly protozoa, as Evolutionary theory predicts.

Please, that is only my interpretation of what Free Servant meant.Free Servant, is that what you meant?

anonymous wrote: That's probably because we don't have all the answers.

Cybele wrote:That's why I keep searching...sigh.

Then you need the company of other people who are searching.Scientifically minded people can provide that sort of company.Religiously minded people cannot provide that sort of company because all they have is pat answers, and they expect you to be content with those pat answers.

Cybele wrote:Until people are in my shoes, they won't understand my perspective. It's not about what feels good to me, It's what I can make sense out of what's right before me.

I think I understand you.I tried yoga. I tried pyramid power. I tried the BahaI Faith. I tried Christian Science. I tried the Unification Church.You name it, Ive tried it.But nothing made sense.At first, Evolutionary theory didnt make sense either.I had to ask questions and I had to think about the answers which I was given.I dont have all the answers I want even now, but Im a darn sight farther along than I was when I was when I was trying religion and new age pap.

Im not asking you to hop on the bandwagon, but Im inviting you to keep studying.If the Evolutionists on this forum are rude to you, dont take it personally.Were not trained propagandists like the cult members are.

sickofit wrote:HAVEING KIDS IS NOT WHAT MARRIAGE IS ABOUT MORON....Being married is about two people becomeing partners..I thought marriage was about both.Don't we have both a mating instinct and a parental instinct?And don't both instincts play an Evolutionary function?

Instinct also has nothing to do with a CIVIL RIGHT..........This is all about a legal civil contract between two people.......NO RELIGION NO HATE NO BIGOTRY CHANGES THAT FACT.

anonymous wrote:That's probably because we don't have all the answers.Cybele wrote:That's why I keep searching...sigh.Then you need the company of other people who are searching.Scientifically minded people can provide that sort of company.Religiously minded people cannot provide that sort of company because all they have is pat answers, and they expect you to be content with those pat answers.Cybele wrote:Until people are in my shoes, they won't understand my perspective. It's not about what feels good to me,It's what I can make sense out of what's right before me.I think I understand you.I tried yoga. I tried pyramid power. I tried the BahaI Faith. I tried Christian Science. I tried the Unification Church.You name it, Ive tried it.But nothing made sense.At first, Evolutionary theory didnt make sense either.I had to ask questions and I had to think about the answers which I was given.I dont have all the answers I want even now, but Im a darn sight farther along than I was when I was when I was trying religion and new age pap.Im not asking you to hop on the bandwagon, but Im inviting you to keep studying.If the Evolutionists on this forum are rude to you, dont take it personally.Were not trained propagandists like the cult members are.

ROFLMAO!

So you tried everything. You are a try-sexual.

Thanks for the invitation. I've already joined the evilutionist elites bandwagon long time ago, in other forums. I just like some whipping sometimes. It helps me release this maxwell demon in me. I only side creationist when they talk science like the big bangin. lol!

<quoted text>I choose to kind of call it God because the oneness of everything is something that I experience all the time. I experience the parts of a whole and take its entirety as one embodiment. And because this experience is in human form, it's just appropriate to relate to it like any other human would relate to another human. lol.Why do I even try to explain the unexplicable?Just like the Grinch who stole christmas "oh the Who-manity!"

Any concept one would have of "God" would have to be wrong...considering the limits of the mind. I believe this might be why "God" is used because of it's generic definition..."God" truly is undefinable.

Actually, I'm all for civil rights but this isn't it. I'm for a degree of socialism too, but in small increments, not in mandates that have no specified end date. Personally, I don't like the State meddling in marriage at all. Create a universal civil union contract that has no basis on sex and leave it at that.

In which case no need for marriage. It's superfluous and anyone who wants a legal partner can have a civil union. Those who prefer the religious traditions of marriage can be married by their church, but the union will not be legally recognized by the state. Only their religion. Otherwise if we don't get rid of marriage then the only other option to ensure that rights remain equal for all is to allow gays to legally get married.

anonymous wrote:

The Church can even bar people from marriage if they have not gotten that contract, but get rid of the State sanctioning of any types of sexual relationships and stop punishing men and women for pregnancies out of wedlock. Stop subsidizing breeding.

How about the state minds its own business when it comes to sexual relationships? The churches too.

anonymous wrote:

Yes, you can have school lunch programs if your district wants them. Just don't set up tax codes that put money in peoples pockets for being a parent. If they can't afford to have kids, DON'T!

Hmm. Kinda see good and bad points here. But it's tangential.

anonymous wrote:

This is a form of behavior modification on the part of the State. All of those efforts are destined to fester the evil at work, not fix it. The gay "thang"? Well, watch and see!Rationality isn't at work here. Party loyalists won't ever see it though so it's important to address behavior modification WITH behavior modification!(behavior modification: yet another bland platitude that amounts to state authorized bullying) They can walk away anytime! They won't!:)

No need for "behaviour modification" if everyone has equal rights. But I thought behaviour modification required the use of tin foil hats. Or was that to protect ourselves against it? Meh, I can't keep track.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.